Drive Technology
- Thread starter NDS
- Start date
DaveShayne
SOC-12
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NDS:
Does the drive loose power the further away you get from planets?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not if they're using the same game effects as in CT.
------------------
I am increasingly of the opinion that RPGs are by the nature of their creation subjective phenomenon. due to the interaction between game designers, game masters, and game players all definitions, rules, settings, and adventures are mutable in acordance with the uncertainty principle as expounded by Heisenburg. This is of course merely my point of view.
David Shayne
Does the drive loose power the further away you get from planets?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not if they're using the same game effects as in CT.
------------------
I am increasingly of the opinion that RPGs are by the nature of their creation subjective phenomenon. due to the interaction between game designers, game masters, and game players all definitions, rules, settings, and adventures are mutable in acordance with the uncertainty principle as expounded by Heisenburg. This is of course merely my point of view.
David Shayne
Why introduce another drive technology? Changing something so fundamental will undoubtedly lead to problems reconciling the existing technology with the new.
I'm assuming that the grav technology is roughly equivalent to thruster plate technology in that it is reactionless, etc. I'm curious how detailed the physics of the grav drive have been detailed. Thruster plate technology seemed to have quite a bit of thought put into it and detailed effects such as thrust falloff being proportional to the angle of incidence to the thrust plate. Anyone have more info on this?
I'm assuming that the grav technology is roughly equivalent to thruster plate technology in that it is reactionless, etc. I'm curious how detailed the physics of the grav drive have been detailed. Thruster plate technology seemed to have quite a bit of thought put into it and detailed effects such as thrust falloff being proportional to the angle of incidence to the thrust plate. Anyone have more info on this?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tlindsey:
Why introduce another drive technology? Changing something so fundamental will undoubtedly lead to problems reconciling the existing technology with the new.
I'm assuming that the grav technology is roughly equivalent to thruster plate technology in that it is reactionless, etc. I'm curious how detailed the physics of the grav drive have been detailed. Thruster plate technology seemed to have quite a bit of thought put into it and detailed effects such as thrust falloff being proportional to the angle of incidence to the thrust plate. Anyone have more info on this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It is emphatically nothing "new" it is the oldest version. It is the generic "Maneuver Drive" from the earliest Traveller.
The physcis are perfectly clear: it is powered from the power pant and makes the ship go.
------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson
Why introduce another drive technology? Changing something so fundamental will undoubtedly lead to problems reconciling the existing technology with the new.
I'm assuming that the grav technology is roughly equivalent to thruster plate technology in that it is reactionless, etc. I'm curious how detailed the physics of the grav drive have been detailed. Thruster plate technology seemed to have quite a bit of thought put into it and detailed effects such as thrust falloff being proportional to the angle of incidence to the thrust plate. Anyone have more info on this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It is emphatically nothing "new" it is the oldest version. It is the generic "Maneuver Drive" from the earliest Traveller.
The physcis are perfectly clear: it is powered from the power pant and makes the ship go.
------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tlindsey:
Why introduce another drive technology? Changing something so fundamental will undoubtedly lead to problems reconciling the existing technology with the new.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There is no "new" drive technology. Just the Classic Traveller complete lack of explaining how it worked. In short:
"Anti-gravity is the second major [technological] breakthrough. The postulated technology produces both neutralization of weight and lateral thrust."
From Striker, Book 2. And that is as far as it goes.
Both the thruster plates and HEPLaR were attempts to explain the technology. And like the Midiclorians, attempts to explain what is essentially magic in a Space Opera always cause more problems than they fix.
Why introduce another drive technology? Changing something so fundamental will undoubtedly lead to problems reconciling the existing technology with the new.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There is no "new" drive technology. Just the Classic Traveller complete lack of explaining how it worked. In short:
"Anti-gravity is the second major [technological] breakthrough. The postulated technology produces both neutralization of weight and lateral thrust."
From Striker, Book 2. And that is as far as it goes.
Both the thruster plates and HEPLaR were attempts to explain the technology. And like the Midiclorians, attempts to explain what is essentially magic in a Space Opera always cause more problems than they fix.
Ah, I see. I was relying too heavily on the thruster plate explanation of how things worked.
You're absolutely right about trying to explain how it works will lead to nothing but problems. It's like trying to explain the physics of how jump works.
I'll stick with Dr. Skull's line of reasoning.
You're absolutely right about trying to explain how it works will lead to nothing but problems. It's like trying to explain the physics of how jump works.
I'll stick with Dr. Skull's line of reasoning.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
The Power *Pant* is really a Vargr on a treadmill!
Sorry. I had to go there...
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hunter,
If your that good with the T20 Editing there won't be a single spelling error!
[This message has been edited by NDS (edited 24 May 2002).]
The Power *Pant* is really a Vargr on a treadmill!
Sorry. I had to go there...
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hunter,
If your that good with the T20 Editing there won't be a single spelling error!
[This message has been edited by NDS (edited 24 May 2002).]
hunter
Ancient - Absent Friend
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by phydaux:
So hunter, is that official errata?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL! Believe it or not, one of the playtesters (tjoneslo I believe) came up with 'manual' powerplants that rely on the physical ability of the living 'engine' such as a horse pulling a cart. Actually very cool, and something that will likely see print eventually.
I'll be we could figure out the 'power output' of a Vargr on a treadmill...
Hunter
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 24 May 2002).]
So hunter, is that official errata?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL! Believe it or not, one of the playtesters (tjoneslo I believe) came up with 'manual' powerplants that rely on the physical ability of the living 'engine' such as a horse pulling a cart. Actually very cool, and something that will likely see print eventually.
I'll be we could figure out the 'power output' of a Vargr on a treadmill...
Hunter
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 24 May 2002).]
IIRC, the original maneuver drive was not necessarily a grav drive. It didn't match well with the grav drive in Striker, and it would have required a much lower accelleration any distance from a planet.
They left it vague, which I thought was good thing. My best candidate was Davis mechanics, but lakely I like the Woodward/Mach's Principle drive.
They left it vague, which I thought was good thing. My best candidate was Davis mechanics, but lakely I like the Woodward/Mach's Principle drive.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
My best candidate was Davis mechanics, but lakely I like the Woodward/Mach's Principle drive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What is "Davis Mechanics"? Also, since we are on the subject, how about this article for a Tachyon drive. http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw61.html
My best candidate was Davis mechanics, but lakely I like the Woodward/Mach's Principle drive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What is "Davis Mechanics"? Also, since we are on the subject, how about this article for a Tachyon drive. http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw61.html
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
LOL! Believe it or not, one of the playtesters (tjoneslo I believe) came up with 'manual' powerplants that rely on the physical ability of the living 'engine' such as a horse pulling a cart. Actually very cool, and something that will likely see print eventually.
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 24 May 2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, I did. I was hoping to sneak it into the Archaic Vehicles Travellers Aide.
LOL! Believe it or not, one of the playtesters (tjoneslo I believe) came up with 'manual' powerplants that rely on the physical ability of the living 'engine' such as a horse pulling a cart. Actually very cool, and something that will likely see print eventually.
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 24 May 2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, I did. I was hoping to sneak it into the Archaic Vehicles Travellers Aide.
Davis mechanics is something the late G. Harry Stein wrote about. Regrettably, the one time I met him I didn't have the nerve to ask him for more details.
The story as I recall it ...
Back in the 1960s engineer Stein and mathematician Davis (his boss) worked for an aerospace company were asked to examine the Dean Drive. They were not impressed with Dean, but wondered IF it did work, how could it work?
Davis postulated a change in Newtonian mechanics (what change? That's what I wanted to ask Mr Stein) that used the third derivitive of position (velocity is the first, acceleration is the second) to convert rotary momentum into linear momentum. They made some test jigs, but the results were inconclusive.
They asked the physicist Henri Coanda (the father of fluidics) to take look at their equations. Supposedly he was able to derive the Plank's length (quantum length) and Reynolds numbers (Reynolds numbers are empirical "fudge factors" in aerodynamics).
Davis, Coanda, and Stein are all dead and they didn't publish. Curiously, Dr Robert Forward once pointed out that converting angular to linear momentum could be a "legal" reactionless drive.
[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 24 May 2002).]
The story as I recall it ...
Back in the 1960s engineer Stein and mathematician Davis (his boss) worked for an aerospace company were asked to examine the Dean Drive. They were not impressed with Dean, but wondered IF it did work, how could it work?
Davis postulated a change in Newtonian mechanics (what change? That's what I wanted to ask Mr Stein) that used the third derivitive of position (velocity is the first, acceleration is the second) to convert rotary momentum into linear momentum. They made some test jigs, but the results were inconclusive.
They asked the physicist Henri Coanda (the father of fluidics) to take look at their equations. Supposedly he was able to derive the Plank's length (quantum length) and Reynolds numbers (Reynolds numbers are empirical "fudge factors" in aerodynamics).
Davis, Coanda, and Stein are all dead and they didn't publish. Curiously, Dr Robert Forward once pointed out that converting angular to linear momentum could be a "legal" reactionless drive.
[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 24 May 2002).]
DaddyDragon
SOC-12
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
The Power *Pant* is really a Vargr on a treadmill!
Sorry. I had to go there...
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
JANE! STOP THIS CRAZY THING!!!!
Regards,
Larry
------------------
"They'd have labelled it an accidental shooting. If he hadn't changed the magazine. Twice."
The Power *Pant* is really a Vargr on a treadmill!
Sorry. I had to go there...
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
JANE! STOP THIS CRAZY THING!!!!
Regards,
Larry
------------------
"They'd have labelled it an accidental shooting. If he hadn't changed the magazine. Twice."
Cptn. Collision Course
SOC-5
re: anti-grav tech, agreed that reality has no place in a good role playing game, just thought this might be interesting -
http://www.americanantigravity.com/
The theorie(s) have yet to be properly published, but its interesting to note Congress has recently approved funds for studying Lifter technology.
Might be time to revise that TL table again...
------------------
" Control, we're switching to manual..."
http://www.americanantigravity.com/
The theorie(s) have yet to be properly published, but its interesting to note Congress has recently approved funds for studying Lifter technology.
Might be time to revise that TL table again...
------------------
" Control, we're switching to manual..."
There's some reason to suspect that the CT manuever drive wasn't a thrust-based drive at all; it's rather difficult to explain with either T-plates or HEPlaR how the performance of a ship doesn't change when you swap out 10 dtons of hydrogen for 10 dtons of bonded superdense, which was the case in CT.
My personal bias is to figure that manuever drives are actually a low-speed warp drive (perhaps a major variant on an Alcubierre metric). Has the benefit that density probably doesn't matter (volume does), and depending on how you assume the warp drive works, you can mostly eliminate relativistic rock bombardment (a ship hitting a planet at a warp speed of 0.9c doesn't necessarily crack the crust; it might just stop). Also means 'grav pong' doesn't work; the drive automatically moves everything within the proper volume equally, making grav compensation irrelevant.
My personal bias is to figure that manuever drives are actually a low-speed warp drive (perhaps a major variant on an Alcubierre metric). Has the benefit that density probably doesn't matter (volume does), and depending on how you assume the warp drive works, you can mostly eliminate relativistic rock bombardment (a ship hitting a planet at a warp speed of 0.9c doesn't necessarily crack the crust; it might just stop). Also means 'grav pong' doesn't work; the drive automatically moves everything within the proper volume equally, making grav compensation irrelevant.
